Alex Ferguson


Status
Not open for further replies.
The most impressive thing for me was the team that won the title in his last season. It was shite by Man UTDs standards yet he still won it.
 
Domestically or internationally?

Probably the greatest in the domestic game, but his record in Europe wasn't that great. And by great I mean winning multiple European cups in a row, which Man U probably should have done, like Liverpool in their heyday.
 
Amazing how time dulls the memory. Amazing amount of disrespect to Alex Ferguson on this thread. 26 years of domestic dominance, building 3 or 4 teams including once made up primarily of academy products. Came close a number of times with the European Cup as well as winning it twice. Outlasted every other manager in an ever changing game. Won things right up until his last season
 
Premier League money helped him and came along at the right time. It was a much level playing field before that, which is why I rank Paisley and Clough just above him. Still a great manager though.
I agree with this. But in an era of spending money SAF showed how to spend it wisely. Where as someone like Keegan didn't.

But we will never see another Clough.
 
Domestically or internationally?

Probably the greatest in the domestic game, but his record in Europe wasn't that great. And by great I mean winning multiple European cups in a row, which Man U probably should have done, like Liverpool in their heyday.
Liverpool only every won it twice in a row unlike Ajax, Bayern and Real who all won it 3 times in a row, Liverpool did well, winning in 4 times in 8 years of course. You could argue that the European Cup was easier to win in that format as it was a straight forward knock out competition and less bias towards the bigger teams
 
Ferguson was the probably most successful manager overall.
Paisley would probably have achieved more had he managed as long as Ferguson.
To take 2 clubs from the 2nd division to League champions and 1 to European Champions 2 years running makes Clough unique, but how much of his success was also down to Taylor?

Paisley gets the edge for me, plus he’s a local lad and a gentleman,
 
Paisley would probably have achieved more had he managed as long as Ferguson
Doubtful. There is a reason why most managers are successful over short spells. Paisley never wanted to be manager and wouldn't have had the desire or motivation to build team after team and re-invent himself in the way Ferguson did
 
Doubtful. There is a reason why most managers are successful over short spells. Paisley never wanted to be manager and wouldn't have had the desire or motivation to build team after team and re-invent himself in the way Ferguson did
I don’t know, he was manager for around 10 year which isn’t really a short spell as far as managers are concerned. If he managed for 3-4 year, I would agree. You also need to remember that Liverpool during his time were such a well oiled machine and always planned ahead which made it easier to maintain their top position. They used to sign many players like Ian Rush and keep them in the reserves for ages to make sure that they were good enough.

It is true though that he never really wanted to be manager, and I don’t think he would even consider the role in today’s climate, but you can only go on his actual record, which as Liverpool’s most successful manager is superb.
 
Maybe it's an age thing but I still put Sir Matt and Shanks on a pedestal. They built up great clubs to last, they created dynasties. You can't take anything away from the massive successes of Ferguson & Paisley but (to some extent) they both reaped the benefits their forebears created from nothing.
 
GOAT

Maybe it's an age thing but I still put Sir Matt and Shanks on a pedestal. They built up great clubs to last, they created dynasties. You can't take anything away from the massive successes of Ferguson & Paisley but (to some extent) they both reaped the benefits their forebears created from nothing.

They didn't have to cope with players who had huge egos and lots of power tbf. Ferguson was around when it was all still a bit old school, and succeeded, and also when the game shifted, and was successful then too. Basically he proved how adaptable he was. Also seemed the best at mind games and finding any possible advantage.
 
Last edited:
Read his books, and read books of players who played for him. No one comes close in the modern era to what he done. He created 3 teams in his tenure and developed some some of the best players this country has produced.

Now the great mourinho is in his shoes. It just shows how good Sir Alex was.
 
Doubtful. There is a reason why most managers are successful over short spells. Paisley never wanted to be manager and wouldn't have had the desire or motivation to build team after team and re-invent himself in the way Ferguson did

Good post.

Read his books, and read books of players who played for him. No one comes close in the modern era to what he done. He created 3 teams in his tenure and developed some some of the best players this country has produced.

Now the great mourinho is in his shoes. It just shows how good Sir Alex was.

How the fuck did he get that team to win the last title? It was shite compared to others around them. The next season when he wasn't there proved it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red
Good post.



How the fuck did he get that team to win the last title? It was shite compared to others around them. The next season when he wasn't there proved it.
Because he was a fantastic man manager. I couldn't put his books down to be honest. Everyone will have heard the stories of the giggs/sharp house party, Keanes bet on horse racing in Manchester.

The bloke was, and still is a genius.
 
3 league titles, 4 Scottish Cups, Cup Winners Cup, Super Cup, League Cup - breaking the Old Firm dominance then effectively repeating that with Man Utd continuous success over a 35 year odd period - has to be Ferguson.
 
It's hard to look past Cloughs obvious achievements but I think it's remarkable how Cloughs kept Forest competitive in later times despite being a alcoholic
 
Last edited:
He got lucky at the start.

Is there another club that has managed to bring through from their academy what turned out to be five star players all at the same time?

He was on the verge of getting the push over some game with Oldham. He gets Cantonna, Keane and Schmeichal who became pivotal players for them. Even Bruce and Pallister performed heroics.

Liverpool's dominance had fallen away. Arsenal had yet to get Wenger. Chelsea didn't have a benefactor and were shit. Man City were in the third division.

Once he got the train moving he was almost unstoppable.

It was his antics with the press and the officials that sours his legacy for me.
 
Maybe it's an age thing but I still put Sir Matt and Shanks on a pedestal. They built up great clubs to last, they created dynasties. You can't take anything away from the massive successes of Ferguson & Paisley but (to some extent) they both reaped the benefits their forebears created from nothing.

Man United were rank when Ferguson took over. I would say he built a dynasty in just the same way - ok, not out of nothing historically, but completely and utterly transformed a badly ailing club and made them the most consistently dominant that we will ever see.

Meanwhile, at Aberdeen - barely a mention in this thread yet - he broke up the Old Firm and won a European trophy.

GOAT



They didn't have to cope with players who had huge egos and lots of power tbf. Ferguson was around when it was all still a bit old school, and succeeded, and also when the game shifted, and was successful then too. Basically he proved how adaptable he was. Also seemed the best at mind games and finding any possible advantage.

It's incredible this. He's the best for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top